China laws and business are very different from the West, of this there should be no dispute. China lawyers

And yet, our China lawyers oftentimes get emails from potential clients telling us that they have drafted a contract for China and asking us whether we would revise that contract to “make it work for China.” Our initial response to this is to say yes but to warn them that our fees for doing so will almost always be the same as our fees for our drafting the contract from scratch. The reason for this is because, with very few exceptions, the contract we are given is so different than what is required for China that its only benefit is that we can pull some (never all) of the terms we need for drafting the contract.

But guess what, that benefit almost never outweighs the harm. Let me explain.

Much of the time when we are given a draft contract that contract is a result of weeks of negotiations between the Western company and the Chinese company. If our China attorneys then substantially revise the contract and our Western company client then sends the substantially revised contract to the Chinese company, the Chinese company is rightly irritated because it believed it had a deal or was on the verge of a deal with the Western company, even though it really wasn’t.

But most of the time, the draft contract we are given is so far afield from what is needed that instead of our China lawyers being able to draft a new contract, our China lawyers instead have to tell our client that it really needs to start back at square one. Most of the time the draft contract we are given is so internally contradictory and so rife with provisions that literally do not work at all under China’s laws, that the first thing we need to do with our client is figure out exactly what it is trying to accomplish with the deal.

And then, once we have that figured out, the next step is usually to draft (in English and in Chinese) a term sheet to send to the Chinese company to determine whether drafting a contract will ever be warranted. Oftentimes, there is a critical provision that the Western company and the Chinese company never previously discussed and on which they are at clear loggerheads. The term sheet quickly reveals this and the parties then choose to go their separate ways. Oftentimes, there is a critical provision that simply cannot legally work and without that provision one or both sides do not want to go forward with the transaction and the parties then choose to go their separate ways.

We see these sorts of looming problems so often with draft agreements that I have drafted the following “template” explanation, which I then modify to fit the particular situation:

We reviewed the draft contract you sent us and we think it premature to begin drafting a contract based on it. Some of it is contradictory, some does not make sense, and some is almost unworkable or illegal. It also fails to address critical deal terms.
What we need to do here is to work with you to figure out what exactly you are seeking to do and then use that to determine whether the Chinese side will be on board with that or not. Once we are clear on what you are seeking to do here, we then draft a term sheet in English and in Chinese and use that to see whether a deal is possible. If a deal is possible, we then move forward on drafting the contract. If it is clear that no deal is possible on your terms, you then determine whether you want to compromise or walk away.
We will charge considerably less to develop the term sheet than we would charge to draft a full-fledged contract. This means that If it turns out no contract is warranted, you will have saved quite a lot of money. If it turns out a contract is warranted, much of what we will have done to develop the term sheet will apply to what we will need to do to draft the subsequent contract.
The above is our advice, but obviously what you do is up to you in the end.
Please let us know.
Print:
EmailTweetLikeLinkedIn
Dan Harris

I am a founder of Harris Bricken, an international law firm with lawyers in Los Angeles, Portland, San Francisco, Seattle, China and Spain.

I mostly represent companies doing business in emerging market countries. It has taken me many years to build my network and it takes constant communication and travel to maintain it. My work has been as varied as securing the release of two improperly held helicopters in Papua New Guinea, setting up a legal framework to move slag from Canada to Poland’s interior, overseeing hundreds of litigation and arbitration matters in Korea, helping someone avoid terrorism charges in Japan, and seizing fish product in China to collect on a debt.

I was named as one of only three Washington State Amazing Lawyers in International Law, I am AV rated by Martindale-Hubbell Law Directory (its highest rating), I am rated 10.0 by AVVO.com (its highest rating), and I am a SuperLawyer.

I am a frequent writer and public speaker on doing business in Asia and I constantly travel between the United States and Asia. I most commonly speak on China law issues and I am the lead writer of the award winning China Law Blog (www.chinalawblog.com). Forbes Magazine, Fortune Magazine, the Wall Street Journal, Investors Business Daily, Business Week, The National Law Journal, The Washington Post, The ABA Journal, The Economist, Newsweek, NPR, The New York Times and Inside Counsel have all interviewed me regarding various aspects of my international law practice.

I am licensed in Washington, Illinois, and Alaska.

In tandem with the international law team at my firm, I focus on setting up/registering companies overseas (via WFOEs, Rep Offices or Joint Ventures), drafting international contracts (NDAs, OEM Agreements, licensing, distribution, etc.), protecting IP (trademarks, trade secrets, copyrights and patents), and overseeing M&A transactions.